By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Your browser seems to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser.

Close

Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Close

'No improvement' in patient safety after Mid Staffs, finds CQC

Hospitals have made “no improvement” in monitoring the quality of patient care in light of the Mid Staffs scandal and “no improvement” in keeping patients safe or treating them with dignity, a major report has said.

Poor hospital care in the last year was also more likely to have had a negative impact on patients than the previous year, the review of NHS and social care services in England found.

More than half a million people aged 65 and over are now being admitted to hospital in an emergency with avoidable problems, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) report also showed.

These problems include malnutrition, pressure ulcers and urinary tract infections.

There has been a 64% increase in the last six years in pneumonia admissions among older people, while inhalation of food or liquid has led to a 52% rise, and admissions for urinary tract infections have seen a 45% increase.

The report said: “In the aftermath of the failures of care at Mid Staffordshire Foundation Trust, our inspectors’ biggest concern in 2012/13 was that acute hospitals made no improvement in assessing and monitoring the quality of care they provided.

“We also found no improvement in safety and safeguarding, or in hospital patients being treated with dignity and respect.

“Around half (47%) of the problems we uncovered in our inspections in the NHS in 2012/13 had a major or moderate impact on patients.

“This is a deterioration from the previous year (39%).”

Overall, CQC inspectors found poor care in around one in 10 of all hospital inspections.

Looking at dignity and nutrition for older people, the CQC said it was “alarmed to see that there were fewer hospitals where patients were always treated with dignity and their privacy and independence respected”.

It said it was “clearly unacceptable that this position, poor to begin with, had deteriorated further.”

Problems included staff discussing confidential patient details in public and staff “talking over patients as though they were not there”.

Patients could not always reach call bells and some staff did not respond to them in a reasonable time, the report went on.

On social care, the report said the care received by many people in 2012/13 was “still poor”.

One in five nursing home inspections revealed safety concerns, such as failing to give out medicines safely.

In half (51%) of cases where inspectors found problems with adult social care, this had a major or moderate impact on people which was “no better than the previous year”.

The report added: “We issued more warning notices to tackle this poor care - 818 in 2012/13, compared with 598 the previous year - an increase of almost 40%.”

The report sets out CQC’s findings about the quality of care in the year to March 31 2013, and is based on more than 35,000 inspections.

An even more rigorous inspection and regulatory process - looking at a wider array of data - has been implemented by the CQC this year.

 

Are you able to Speak out Safely?

Sign our petition to put pressure on your trust to support an open and transparent NHS

Readers' comments (6)

  • Unimpeachable care,
    all of the time
    needs endless supply of money.

    More money would enable care establishments (hospitals, care homes etc) to employ extra care staff who can be at the beck and call of all who need them.

    Statistically there is an aging population in the UK, and therefore it is logical to presume there will be more care needs year in and year out.

    There is no endless supply of money, there are no extra care staff…..can anyone do the maths on this one?

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • You don't need an "endless supply of money". But you do need to manage and direct funding appropriately. Millions are being wasted. Sort that out and then see where you stand.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • tinkerbell

    David Prior - head of CQC - also previously Chief Executive of the national Conservative Party and its deputy Chairman.

    Such a sad, sad situation if there has been 'no improvement' and unlikely to be any either with all the cutbacks to services and culling of frontline staff and more 'suits' destroying services and wasting millions on layers of management and re-disorganisation.







    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • michael stone

    Sadly this isn't a surprise to me.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • Trusts are paid to provide a good standard of care, if they're not providing that then they need to be dealt with in the most severe terms: contracts need to be lost, poor performing wards and hospitals should close, people need to lose their jobs.

    Until heads start rolling and people start losing their jobs, nothing will change.

    Unsuitable or offensive?

  • It must be hard to be at your best in providing best care when staff are so demoralised. I'm sure it's all a ploy to move the NHS into privatisation. Thing is we all know that, but feel helpless to stop it. The public need to be more aware, they are the ones with the voice. It's propaganda at it's best!!

    Unsuitable or offensive?

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

Related Jobs

Sign in to see the latest jobs relevant to you!

newsletterpromo